The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1887-06-22

and brewing associations are pouring
into the State will DO used "where it
will do the most good" A commit
tee from Dallas is now in the North
west trying to raise campaign fund
sufficiently large to get local Demo-
cratic leaders throughout the State to
take the stump" Will they buy
them? Are local Democratic leaders
| up for sale? Are Democratic voters
TO be purchased? They said when the
campaign opened, this amendment
was undemocratic, and would be
buried beneath 10000 Democratic
majority; but now they arc begging
for large campaign fund, and soy If
they don't get it the State is lost by
$4,000 majority for prohibition. In
Democratic communities the liquor
dealers have instructed their speakers
to tell the people that it is alt0g ether
undemocratic to consider or vote for
the proposed prohi amendment,
and in Republican districts they are
instructed to tell them it is anti'Re-
publican to vote for this Demo
cratic mtndment. The two preach.
ers, Jackson and Herring, and Mcssrs.
Gibbs and Mills are going up and
down the State to whip Democrats
into voting against prohibition, whilst
the Rev. Melvin Wade, Arch Cochran
and Jimmy Newcomb are stumping
everywhere trying to drive Rspub-
licans into the whisky net. The
whisky orators agree, however, in one
thing, viz: That it is highly impI oper
for preachers to urge the people to
put this prolific source of crime and
degradation out of the State, but it is
very proper for some of them to COR
tend for "more whisky and bigger
brands"
Which IS the safer counsellor for the
citizen, he who breaches obedience to
law and order, or he who sets all de-
cency at defiance, consults with rum
sellers and launches forth on the peo-
pie the blasphcmy and ridicule which
they teach him to repeat?
The whisky speakers appeal to all
selfish and mercenary consid-
erations, and declare that taxation
is more burden some in Maine
and Kansas than in Texas.
BY reference 10 the census
report of 1880, we find below ::
Name had population ...............Gi s. 1855.
Assessed value OF property. S235, 9Ie, ZIG.
E fSnSH,s for schools sooi s sSS
Kansas had population ........... 996, 096.
Assessed value Of property sl60,s al $3.50.
| Schools .......... ................. GAS.
| Expended for schools. Sl.Sl9,56l
Texas had population. .......... i, so, I45.
Assessed value of Property 1885,, 5l5.
S SnmSnSod for scboois s7ss o aS5
Maine paid one dollar and fifty
cents per capita for school purposes.
Kansas paid two dollars per capita
for schools.
Texas paid fifty cents per capita for
schools.
This shows what become of the
taxes, and will the liquor law advo-
Gates dare say 10 Texans,
yon had better spend your money for
whisky licenses and crime than for
education? Another serious charge
they bring against Maine to show that
prohibition will not prohibit Z" is that
last year there were 2800 arrests in that
State for drunkenness. This is rs
gauzy as the "grapo ulture" argu-
ment. There were 1043 arrests for
drunkenness in Dallas last year-say
one 10 every thirty of population.
The State of Mairo has $4,000 popu-
lation and on the same be sis as Dallas
there ought to have been $4,000 ar
rests tor drunkenness.
Let us try prohibition and see if we
can get the arrests for drunkenness in
Dallas down 10 the Maine standard.
WHITE.